The appeal behind topless modelling?

Asides from the obvious reason, after my experiences from many photo sessions and looking through other photographers' portfolios that claim to capture these so called 'tasteful' topless and nude shots (although in many cases I fail to see claimed tastefulness), I find myself frequently wondering why photographers are so keen on capturing images like these, as I have a suspicion the intention isn't always pure - perhaps some even use photography as a front solely for seeing an undressed woman? I answered a casting call recently from a photography student requesting a model to wear some dresses for his fashion project, which was actually left to the last minute as he had no pictures and his project needed to be handed in the following week, for which he could only offer £50 for up to 8 hours - so I was actually doing him a favour answering him at such short notice for pretty much F all! What he didn't specify in the description was that the dress was actually a tatty piece of see-through material with a hole in the middle to fit my head in, and I wasn't even allowed to wear underwear, yet he could 'photoshop out anything I wanted' such as nipples and genialia - yet when I tried to compromise with him by offering to cover those bits with parcel tape for my comfort, it was a problem and he remarked with 'well that would just look silly, wouldn't it'- which would make anyone go wtf, how does that make sense?! After telling me that this was for the purpose of fashion and that he couldn't tailor his ideas to suit me, I decided enough was enough and I walked out.Has this ever happened to anybody before? What is it with some photographers that seem so desperate to get a woman naked, even if she doesn't feel comfortable? I also fail to understand how people like this don't have a single bit of negative feedback on their page too!

This seems a bit of a hypocritical post with your Naked Wood Nymph photograph in your portfolio, with a large amount of lingerie shots also populating your profile. Regardless of this, your issue is primarily with the lack of clarification from the photographer you worked with. You were probably right to walk out, so leave him some negative feedback. You also seem to be complaining about his rate, yet you still chose to go along; you have no right to complain about the rate of pay. You knew what to expect financially.

Unfortunately in the world of photography you do get the occasional rogue photographer, just as in the world of modelling you get models who let you down repeatedly. Sadly it happens and you seem to have been caught out. Maybe next time get a photographer to send you an image of the outfit you intend to wear.

Different photographers specialise in different forms of portraiture. It's no different to naturist art classes - photographers in general see the human form as artistic and wish to capture a perfectly lit model. It does not mean that these photographers are just there to get themselves sexual gratification, which is what you seem to be implying. Some photographers specialise in porn - which to me is tacky personally - but it's their choice. And there are a lot of models who want to get into that kind of work too - it's not just photographers forcing them to do this.

Your thread seems to be overtly negative towards photographers who work with nudes, and I suspect you may ruffle a few feathers. Don't let one bad experience tar your views of other photographers with the same brush.

Well no, hardly hypocritical as my wood nymph shots have obvious context and purpose to them, I addition to that I'm not showing any private area or bare breast, so that's not even on a comparable scale. And of course I have the right to complain if I wasn't expecting a sheet of torn chiffon with holes in it to constitute as a 'dress', anybody in the right mind would. With pornography and adult material, it has a purpose and we all know what it is, and the same can be said with erotica and very high context themes such as images that depict a powerful message - but what I'M referring to are photographs where the purpose is not clear and is rather ambiguous, or doesn't seem to look 'right', if you get what I mean. For example, a random fully naked woman with her genitalia out posing in the middle of a cornfield wearing sunglasses and a hat - if that's not classified as adult but the photographer claims it as art... well, anyone could tell you that art is subjective, but really? Like, seriously, is that what you'd call it, because when I see an image like that I really struggle to link the two together. I am also aware that I have images that show more flesh, but like I said, the context is clear with no ambiguity, I'm not attempting to rose tint or make it out to be something it's not supposed to be.

A lot of men, especially older ones I'd wager, just like to look at tits... it's that simple. Perhaps it reminds them of their youth when that's all you could see with adult material, or perhaps it's an obsession born from their fascination with 'Page 3'.

Glamour in general doesn't really have a purpose, other than to show women off with as much sex-appeal as possible.

But yes, there are photographers whose photographic ideas are somewhat obtuse / disturbing yet in their heads they are producing 'art', it doesn't necessarily mean they're up to no good though. Perhaps they've been warped over the years by nagging wives who don't give them the attention they like, who knows?

Reminds me of my youth when I had a Saturday job in a local camera shop. The top floor was fitted with studio lights and a vaguely beach-like backdrop. Two models were 'on duty' dressed in bikinis and guys would come in, hire the studio, models and a camera on an hourly basis. Curiously, they rarely bought any film (pre-digital age).

That doesn't fill me with much confidence but I must say your explanation does make sense and sounds all too plausible lol

Just have the guts to stand your ground and tell them you're not doing anything tacky.

Part of the problem with modelling / photography is people's perceptions of what a particular genre consists of. For example 'glamour' can be anything ranging from high-quality sensual lingerie shots right down to tacky shots of women squeezing their boobs together while pouting at the camera. You've just got to be sure you're clear what the photographer intends to shoot and if he's good enough to do it.

I'll confess I shoot what I consider to be glamour (albeit high-end), though I've had many say it isn't glamour and borders on fashion / commercial lingerie.

That is very true, I learnt that the convoluted way when I walked out on my last shoot - tbh I had no suspicions as the guy seemed legit and I certainly wasn't expecting to land myself in the poo poo like that. What I took away from that was to trust less, which is sad as trusting and adaptability was one of my proud positives. But for the sake of safety and saving valuable time, it's definitely better to be cautious than overly open and trusting.

I've definitely learnt that now, next time I'm helping a fashion or art student, I'm gonna ask for pictures of the clothing, as I certainly don't wish to be wearing bits of holey crap as dresses lol. The worst bit was he carried on trying to convince me to wear it even after I made it clear I did not want to do it, then almost hinted that I was to blame for putting him in a difficult position - like it was my bloody fault that he left his dissertation till the last minute and getting stuck in this mess! Never again, never again.

First, I agree nobody should be pushed to work in a way which makes them uncomfortable. Your levels don't show nude or implied nude. Levels should be clearly stated with no hint of ambiguity in order that folk can understand and respect them.

Leading on from that, you show a nude picture on your portfolio, arguably two, so that might cause a confusion, or understandable misinterpretation. That you say they're is 'context'is no more plausible or workable an explanation than of the photographer shooting a nude stood in a field, with or without sunglasses and hat.

Fashion is fashion, as the model you really don't have to like it, you need to wear it though and make it look as good as you can. Most people think fashion is putting on something from Dotty P that's just been delivered to the shop, that's high street, fashion is often months or years before that happens and sometimes it's dreadful shit. Still a models job to, well, model it!

If you agree a rate for a job, you shouldn't be surprised or annoyed to have agreed a price less than you felt reasonable, that's your fault. You say your rates are standard, I have literally no idea what standard rates are? You mean agency, internet, what?

The 'obvious reasons' thing you mention in starting? One of those obvious reasons is art, and really, it's entirely for the artist to decide what they feel qualifies. Nude bodies really are common as rain in the history of art. If you want to make something you feel is tasteful and artistic, pay someone to shoot it for you or work with someone in collaboration to get the right kind of thing. You really don't have much input when asked to complete a paid job as far as design and styling are concerned, that's not your job. Sometimes you can contribute, which is nice, but it's really not your job.

You'll possibly think this comes over as negative, and it would be really in response to your post, but as someone with maybe 6 or 8 nude women stood about in a field type pictures, I'd be one of the target group you are pointing at perhaps? Me, I like a nude model, in fact I think it's a dozen times easier to work with a nude than to try and create a convincing fashion shot. I like that, and if I'm paying the right person to work with me, what is the problem?

If you watch FTN (The fashion channel) It's full of lasses with nipples showing. And most fashion, is garbage, I did a catwalk show once and a lass came out with a dress made of asda carriers.
So...
- He offered you £50 to model a nondescript piece of clothing.
- You accepted the assignment, one which is within your publicly stated levels.
- You're a model.
Sooo.... ? your problem with him is what ?
If models take the time to ask the right questions, they don't go into a blind job. #Communication
Nobody likes PM-PingPong, but sometimes it's necessary. If you don't have the patience for it, well, that's when these things happen.
If you'd walked off my job, I wouldn't have paid you at all. Had that not been a student, but a work deadline for a company... whoa, you better do some reading. If someone loses a multi-thousand £ job because of your decision to leave, you could well be looking at a large invoice on your doorstep to cover losses and at worst, some kind of legal action. This is why professionals use agencies, not internet modelling sites.
From what you've written, a rethink on port presentation maybe in order.

Well you were absolutely right to feel as you did. A dress is a dress and what you wear underneath it is your business. This guy wanted to shoot you in a dress if he wanted you to be naked underneath it he should have expressed this. It should not be up to you to ascertain this. There are posts on here saying you should have acted like a model and go along with the brief but you were mislead.

You were within your rights to leave the shoot and you should be applauded for it.

Totally cringing at the hash tag you slipped in there, but did I say I got paid like you're assuming? For you information, I did not care for payment as my main priority was getting of there. Oh, and cheers for the advice captain hindsight, if you even read the multiple replies where I said I've learnt from this bad experience! The kind of work he was asking me to do would have involved breaking into the nude boundary, and that's not a level I work up to, so you're wrong in the sense that I knew what I was letting myself in for - I was misled and I believe it was within deliberation. He wouldn't even let me wear parcel tape ffs, yet he offered to photoshop out my nipples and labia! Does that sound right to you? At all? Because that sure seemed sketchy as hell to me.

Well you were absolutely right to feel as you did. A dress is a dress and what you wear underneath it is your business. This guy wanted to shoot you in a dress if he wanted you to be naked underneath it he should have expressed this. It should not be up to you to ascertain this. There are posts on here saying you should have acted like a model and go along with the brief but you were mislead.
You were within your rights to leave the shoot and you should be applauded for it.